Diagnostic accuracy in child sexual abuse medical evaluation: Role of experience, training, and expert case review

详细信息	查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

• 作者：Joyce A. Adams^a ; ; Suzanne P. Starling^b ; Lori D. Frasier^c ; Vincent J. Palusci^d ; Robert Allan Shapiro^e ; Martin A. Finkel^f ; Ann S. Botash^g
• 关键词：Child sexual abuse ; Medical examination ; Interpretation of findings ; Competence
• 刊名：Child Abuse and Neglect
• 出版年：2012
• 期刊代码：51_01452134
• 类别：med
• 出版时间：May, 2012
• 卷：36
• 期：5
• 页码：383-392
• 文件大小：370 K

摘要

Objectives

(1) The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of clinicians who examine children for suspected sexual abuse to recognize and interpret normal and abnormal ano-genital findings in magnified photographs using an online survey format. (2) Determine which factors in education, clinical practice, and case review correlate with correct responses to the survey questions.

Methods

Between July and December 2007, medical professionals participated in a web-based survey. Participants answered questions regarding their professional background, education, clinical experience, and participation in case review. After viewing photographs and clinical information from 20 cases, participants answered 41 questions regarding diagnosis and medical knowledge. Answers chosen by an expert panel were used as the correct answers for the survey.

Results

The mean number of correct answers among the 141 first-time survey respondents was 31.6 (SD 5.9, range 15-41). Child Abuse Pediatricians (CAP) had mean total scores which were significantly higher than Pediatricians (Ped) (34.8 vs. 30.1, p < 0.05) and Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANE) (34.8 vs. 29.3, p < 0.05). The mean total scores for Ped, SANE, and Advanced Practice Nurses (APN) who examine fewer than 5 children monthly for possible CSA were all below 30. Total score was directly correlated with the number of examinations performed monthly (p = 0.003). In multivariable regression analysis, higher total score was associated with self-identification as a CAP, reading The Quarterly Update newsletter (p < 0.0001), and with quarterly or more frequent expert case reviews using photo-documentation (p = 0.0008).

Conclusions

Child Abuse Pediatricians, examiners who perform many CSA examinations on a regular basis, examiners who regularly review cases with an expert, and examiners who keep up to date with current research have higher total scores in this survey, suggesting greater knowledge and competence in interpreting medical and laboratory findings in children with CSA. Review of cases with an expert in CSA medical evaluation and staying up to date with the CSA literature are encouraged for non-specialist clinicians who examine fewer than 5 children monthly for suspected sexual abuse.